DOCSLIB.ORG

Fort Matanzas--The Little Fort with the Big Job

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fort Matanzas--The Little Fort with the Big Job Fort Matanzas--The Little Fort With the Big Job Standards-Based Activities (4th-5th grade) NOTE: This activity set can stand alone or be used as an introduction for a fieldtrip to Fort Matanzas National Monument, St. Augustine, Florida (904) 471-0116 Contents: 1) Reading 2) Writing 3) Math 4) Answer Page Designed by Linda A. Chandler (Interpretive Specialist, Fort Matanzas National Monument) For more Florida Standards-based activities in science and social studies, check out http://pelotes.jea.com. Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Anastasia Island, a long, thin barrier island, stretches for nearly sixteen miles from the St. Augustine Inlet south to the Matanzas Inlet. Behind this island is the Matanzas River. This river and the Matanzas Inlet were called the "backdoor to St. Augustine", and they would be a good way for enemies to try to sneak up on St. Augustine from the rear. The Spanish were concerned about this potential danger, and as early as 1569 they built a wooden watchtower surrounded by a stockade somewhere near the south end of Anastasia Island to keep watch against enemies approaching from the south. This was just a lookout tower as it was not strong enough to hold cannons. If a strange ship was sighted, the Spanish could somehow signal St. Augustine or send a boat with a warning message. No doubt several such towers were built to replace the previous ones which fell down or were washed away, but no sign of any has ever been found. Only Spanish records tell us about the wooden watchtowers at Matanzas. Pirates did attack from the south at least twice. In 1683 English pirates sneaked up on the unarmed tower at dawn, captured it, and forced one of the soldiers to lead them up the river to St. Augustine. The soldier cleverly led the pirates up a dead-end creek instead and escaped to warn St. Augustine. Three years later, another group of pirates landed south of the Matanzas tower, but St. Augustine had been warned about them, too, and Spanish soldiers routed the pirates before they got far. With the British in the Carolinas work started in 1672 on the Castillo de San Marcos, the large, coquina fort built to protect the main inlet and harbor at St. Augustine. Perhaps there was some thought to building a more substantial tower at Matanzas, but the Castillo, which took twenty-three years to build, occupied all the available money and manpower. In 1736 the engineer Antonio de Arredondo was sent to Florida by the Spanish Crown to inspect the fortifications. In his report he recommended that a tower that could mount cannon be built at Matanzas, but when he returned to St. Augustine two years later, the hostilities with British Georgia were heating up so much that it was decided to modernize the Castillo instead and install bombproof vaults and more cannon there. Matanzas would have to wait. However, the British under James Oglethorp attacked St. Augustine in 1740. His plan was to blockade the two inlets. The Spanish would not be able to send a boat for help, and supply ships would not be able to land. They would run out of food and ammunition and be forced to surrender. Nevertheless, the Spanish were able to get a message out by boat through the Matanzas Inlet before the blockade was tightened. The boat made it to Cuba and brought back a fleet of supply ships which anchored near Mosquito Inlet 60 miles to the south. A courier took word to St. Augustine that supplies had arrived. Coincidentally, the British ship, which had been guarding the Matanzas Inlet, had just received orders to return to St. Augustine. So the way was clear to send small, shallow-draft boats out the Matanzas Inlet to meet the boats at Mosquito Inlet and bring the food in up the Matanzas River, through the back door. Oglethorpe gave up his siege and returned to Georgia, but his attack had shown again the importance of the Matanzas Inlet. Not only was it St. Augustine's lifeline to the outside, but it was also a weak point, a place where the British might try to sneak in, sail up the river, and hit St. Augustine from the rear. And Spanish Governor Montiano knew the British would try again. He needed a fort at Matanzas. However, fortifications could not be erected without expressed royal permission, but sending a request to the king back in Spain and getting a reply would take too long. What should he do? Montiano conferred with his advisors, and they found a way. Along with Arredondo's recommendation there had been a royal communication that authorized Montiano to perform whatever repairs he judged necessary for the security of St. Augustine. The decision was made to begin construction of Fort Matanzas without delay, and this time, it would be a coquina fort, small and built in a hurry, but built to last and built for cannon. Even before the fort was finished, the British attacked. However, a Spanish sloop and galley stationed just inside the inlet repulsed them. By the time the British returned the next year (1742), the five cannon from the fort itself forced the British to retreat. Another attempt in 1743 was likewise unsuccessful. And so the soldiers came to Matanzas for 30 day tours of duty. They kept watch night and day, summer and winter, knowing they had the important job of protecting their homes and families back in St. Augustine. It does not always take something (or someone) big to do an important job. Little Fort Matanzas and its handful of soldiers did their job well. No one, neither the British nor the pirates, ever attacked St. Augustine again, once Fort Matanzas was built to guard the back door. Sources: Arana, Luis Rafael. "Fort Matanzas: Guardian of St. Augustine's back door". St. Augustine, FL: Castillo de San Marcos, 1978. Http://www.nps.gov/foma/home/home/htm. "Fort Matanzas On Line" National Park Service, Fort Matanzas National Monument, 2001. Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Standards-Based Reading Questions 1. What shows that the Spanish were concerned early about the potential danger of an unguarded inlet at Matanzas? Use details and information from the article to support your answer. __________________________________________________________________________ Read Think __________________________________________________________________________ Explain __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 2. Why was Fort Matanzas built? a) To guard the main inlet to St. Augustine b) To fight the pirates c) To guard the back way into St. Augustine d) To guard against the French 3. Who was Montiano? a) A Spanish engineer b) A British general c) Governor of St. Augustine d) Governor of Cuba 4. Spanish soldiers "routed" the pirates. Using context clues, what is the meaning of the Word "routed"? a) narrowly win against b) drive off overwhelmingly c) show the correct way to d) surrender to Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Standards-Based Reading Questions--Continued 5. Why was it important to guard the Matanzas Inlet. There are at least two reasons. Use details and information from the article to support your answer. __________________________________________________________________________ Read Think __________________________________________________________________________ Explain __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Standards-Based Writing Questions 1. The Spanish soldiers spent a month at a time at little Fort Matanzas. Think about being in a small, isolated place without electricity or refrigeration. Write to explain what their life might have been like there. 2. The soldiers' lives at Matanzas might have been boring, but they had an important job to do. Think about a time when you were given an important job that perhaps you did not want to do at first. Write a story about this time and what you did. Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Standards-Based Math Questions 1. The base of Fort Matanzas is square. If one side is 49.5 feet, what is the perimeter of the fort in yards? a. 16.5 yards b. 66.0 yards c. 198.0 yards d. 594.0 yards 2. The Spanish used a measurement called a "vara" which is equal to 33 of our inches. The sides of Fort Matanzas are 49.5 feet at the base. How long is each side of Fort Matanzas in varas? Show your work. THINK SOLVE EXPLAIN 3. The soldiers had to clean the cistern (water tank) at the fort periodically to keep the water clean. They would wait until it was getting low, empty the cistern into barrels, clean and scrub the cistern, and pour the barrels back in. If there was still 250 gallons of water in the cistern, how long would it take to scoop out the water using a two gallon bucket if they could scoop out two bucketfuls each minute? Round your answer to the nearest minute. a. 32 minutes b. 50 minutes c. 63 minutes d. 125 minutes Fort Matanzas - The Little Fort with the Big Job Standards-Based Math Questions 4. The men were sent to Fort Matanzas for a month at a time. It did not always work out evenly. The chart below shows how many months each of these six friends spent at Matanzas over a five-year period. Fort Matanzas Duty Name Months at Fort Matanzas Pedro 10 Francisco 15 Julio 12 Juan 19 Carlos 9 Bernardo 16 Using the chart “Fort Matanzas Duty”, create a bar graph showing how many months each man spent at Fort Matanzas. Arrange the men alphabetically.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • USGS 7.5-Minute Image Map for Matanzas Inlet, Florida
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MATANZAS INLET QUADRANGLE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FLORIDA T9S 7.5-MINUTE SERIES 81°15' 12'30" 10' 81°07' 30" IntracoastalR30E4 000m Waterway 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 29°45' 76 E 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 610 000 FEET 86 87 29°45' 3291000mN 3291 FLORIDA 2 «¬A1 S Devils Elbow T . r J e O v H i R N S S s s 11 32 32 a C 90 90 z O n a t a M Anastasia Island 3289 3289 12 1 960 000 FEET «¬A1 3288 3288 T9S R30E 13 Fort 3287 Matanzas 3287 FORT MATANZAS NATIONAL MONUMENT 24 Imagery................................................NAIP, January 2010 Roads..............................................©2006-2010 Tele Atlas Names...............................................................GNIS, 2010 42'30" 42'30" Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010 Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2010 Claude Varne ATLANTIC Bridge Matanzas Inlet OCEAN 3286 3286 DR RIA TA RA AR B G E N E E Rattlesnake J RD Summer Haven O SON Island HN OLD A1A J U N E E A1 32 32 L «¬ 85 85 N M a t a n z a s s R i v e r 3284 3284 3283 3283 ST. JOHNS CO FLAGLER CO «¬A1 3282 Intracoastal Waterway 3282 40' 40' Hemming Point N N O C E A N Marineland S H O R E E B r L V e D v i 32 R DEERWOOD ST 3281 81 2 s a BEACHSIDE DR k z e n e a r t C a r r M e SHADY OAK LN c i .
    [Show full text]
  • Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, Florida: Maintenance Dredging
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, TO MIAMI, FLORIDA MAINTENANCE DREDGING Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville Jacksonville, Florida May 1974 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY. JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI MAINTENANCE DREDGING ( ) Draft (X) Final Responsible Office: U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida. 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Eleven shoals are to be removed from this section of the Intracoastal Waterway as a part of the regular main­ tenance program. 3. a. Environmental Impacts. About 172,200 cubic yards of shoal material in the channel will be removed by hydraulic dredge and placed in diked upland areas and as nourishment on a county park beach south of Jupiter Inlet. b. Adverse Environmental Effects. Dredging will have a temporary adverse effect on water quality and will destroy benthic organisms in both the shoal material and on the beach. In addition, some turtle nests at the beach nourishment site may be destroyed. 4. Alternatives. Consideration was given to alternate methods of spoil disposal. It was determined that the methods selected (as described in paragraph 1) would best accomplish the purpose of the project while minimizing adverse impact on the environment. 5. Comments received on the draft statement in response to the 3 November 1972 coordination letter: Respondent Date of Comments U. S. Coast Guard 7 November 1972 U. S. Department of Agriculture 8 November 1972 Florida State Museum 8 November 1972 Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 14 November 1972 Florida Department of Transportation 20 November 1972 Florida Department of Natural Resources 30 November 1972 Environmental Protection Agency 8 December 1972 Florida G&FWFC 13 December 1972 U.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB NO. 1024-0018 Expires 10-31-87 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service For NPS us« only ._ MAY 27 1986 National Register off Historic Places received ll0 Inventory Nomination Form date entered &> A// J^ See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections_______________ 1. Name historic St. Augustine Historic District and or common 2. Location N/A street & number __ not for publication St. Augustine city, town vicinity of Florida state code 12 county St. Johns code 109 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use x district public occupied agriculture X museum building(s) private X unoccupied ^ commercial X .park structure X both work in progress X educational X . private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible X entertainment X religious object in process yes: restricted X government scientific being considered X yes: unrestricted industrial transportation x military . other: 4. Owner off Property name Multiple street & number N/A St. Augustine N/A city, town vicinity of state Florida 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. St. Johns County Courthouse street & number 95 Cordova Street city, town St. Augustine state Florida 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title St. Augustine Survey has this property been determined eligible? X yes __ no date 1978-1986 federal X state county local depository for survey records Florida Department of State; Hist. St. Augustine Preservation Bd, city, town Tallahassee and St. Augustine state Florida 7. Description Condition Check one Check one ___4;ejteeHent . deteriorated unaltered original site OOOu ruins altered moved date __ fair unexposed Describe the present and original (iff known) physical appearance SUMMARY OF PRESENT AND ORIGINAL PHYSICAL APPEARANCE The revised St.
    [Show full text]
  • The St. Augustine Directory
    THE It. Augustine iiRECTORY, CONTAINING A GENERA!. DIRECTORY OF THE CITIZENS, THE CHURCHES, SCHOOLS, SOCIETIES, STREETS, AND A BUSINESS DIRECTORY. TO WHICH IS ADDED A CONDENSED HISTORY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, GIVING A GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACES OF INTEREST IN AND ABOUT THE ANCIENT CITY, CONTAINING 5riftp €n0ratiing^sf, a Sl@ap of ^lugujStiue, AND MUCH MATTER OF INTEREST TO THE TOURIST. CHAPIN & CO., PUIUHSHERS, Museum Building, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLA. RESIDENCE OF Dr. C. P. CARVER. The oldest House^ in the oldest City in the United States. THE STREETS OF ST. AUGUSTINE. Artillery Lane, extends from Bay Street to St. George Street. Ballard, extends from the Bay to Shell Road. Bay, extends from Fort Marion to the Barracks. Bravo, extends from Bay Street to Hospital. Bridge, extends from Bay Street to St. Sebastian River. Bronson, extends from King Street to St. Sebastian River. Ceilland, extends from Fort Marion to Hospital Creek. Charlotte, extends from Fort Marion to Maria Sanchez Creek. Clinch, extends from the Bay to Shell Road. Cuna, extends from the Bay to Tolomato Street. Fort, extends from Charlotte Street to St. George Street. Green, extends from Bay Street to St. George Street. Grove Avenue, extends from Shell Road to St. Sebastian River. Hospital, extends from King Street to Bridge Street. Hypolita, extends from Bay Street to Tolomato Street. King, extends from Bay Street to New St. Augustine. Locust, extends from the Bay to Shell Road. Marine, extends from King Street to Maria Sanchez Creek. Mulberry, extends from the Bay to Shell Road. Myrtle, extends from Shell Road to the Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • In the First District Court of Appeal State of Florida
    Filing # 86133755 E-Filed 03/08/2019 06:28:15 PM IN THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA JOSE OLIVIA, in his official capacity as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, et al., Appellants, CASE NO. 1D18-3141 LT CASE Nos. 2015-CA-001423 v. 2015-CA-002682 FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION, INC., et al., Appellees, _________________________________/ REPLY TO APPELLANT LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ RESPONSE TO WATERKEEPERS FLORIDA’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES Waterkeepers Florida respectfully submits this Reply to the Appellant Legislative Parties’ (Appellants) Response to Waterkeepers Florida’s Motion for Leave to File an Amicus Curiae Brief in order to address mischaracterizations and factual inaccuracies made by Appellants in their Response, and states as follows: RECEIVED, 03/08/2019 06:28:33 PM, Clerk, First District Court of Appeal 1 I. APPELLANTS MISCHARACTERIZE WATERKEEPERS FLORIDA AS “LITTLE MORE THAN AN ALTER EGO OF ST. JOHNS RIVERKEEPER.”1 Contrary to the characterization of Waterkeepers Florida that was made in the Appellants’ Response, Waterkeepers Florida is not at all an “alter ego” of St. Johns Riverkeeper. It is, in fact, a separate entity comprised of multiple waterkeeper organizations across the state (of which the St. Johns Riverkeeper is one) each having equal input as to Waterkeeper Florida’s activities. Waterkeepers Florida is composed of thirteen (13) separate Waterkeeper organizations working in the State of Florida. Therefore, the issues addressed, the geography covered, and the number of participants in Waterkeepers Florida extends far beyond that of the St. Johns Riverkeeper organization, and the implication by Appellants that Waterkeepers Florida is merely an alias for a single member organization is false.
    [Show full text]
  • The Elkton Hastings Historic Farmstead Survey, St
    THE ELKTON HASTINGS HISTORIC FARMSTEAD SURVEY, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared For: St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners 2740 Industry Center Road St. Augustine, Florida 32084 May 2009 4104 St. Augustine Road Jacksonville, Florida 32207- 6609 www.bland.cc Bland & Associates, Inc. Archaeological and Historic Preservation Consultants Jacksonville, Florida Charleston, South Carolina Atlanta, Georgia THE ELKTON HASTINGS HISTORIC FARMSTEAD SURVEY, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners St. Johns County Miscellaneous Contract (2008) By: Myles C. P. Bland, RPA and Sidney P. Johnston, MA BAIJ08010498.01 BAI Report of Investigations No. 415 May 2009 4104 St. Augustine Road Jacksonville, Florida 32207- 6609 www.bland.cc Bland & Associates, Inc. Archaeological and Historic Preservation Consultants Atlanta, Georgia Charleston, South Carolina Jacksonville, Florida MANAGEMENT SUMMARY This project was initiated in August of 2008 by Bland & Associates, Incorporated (BAI) of Jacksonville, Florida. The goal of this project was to identify and record a specific type of historic resource located within rural areas of St. Johns County in the general vicinity of Elkton and Hastings. This assessment was specifically designed to examine structures listed on the St. Johns County Property Appraiser’s website as being built prior to 1920. The survey excluded the area of incorporated Hastings. The survey goals were to develop a historic context for the farmhouses in the area, and to make an assessment of the farmhouses with an emphasis towards individual and thematic National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) potential. Florida Master Site File (FMSF) forms in a SMARTFORM II database format were completed on all newly surveyed structures, and updated on all previously recorded structures within the survey area.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Matanzas National Monument Digital Documentation Project:Â
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Digital Heritage and Humanities Collections Faculty and Staff Publications Tampa Library 8-2013 Fort Matanzas National Monument Digital Documentation Project: Utilizing Terrestrial Lidar For The Understanding Of Structural Integrity Concerns For Coastal Forts And Coquina Structures (Cesu,National Park Service) Lori D. Collins University of South Florida, [email protected] Travis F. Doering University of South Florida, [email protected] Jorge Gonzalez University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/dhhc_facpub Scholar Commons Citation Collins, Lori D.; Doering, Travis F.; and Gonzalez, Jorge, "Fort Matanzas National Monument Digital Documentation Project: Utilizing Terrestrial Lidar For The Understanding Of Structural Integrity Concerns For Coastal Forts And Coquina Structures (Cesu,National Park Service)" (2013). Digital Heritage and Humanities Collections Faculty and Staff Publications. 3. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/dhhc_facpub/3 This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Tampa Library at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Digital Heritage and Humanities Collections Faculty and Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FORT MATANZAS NATIONAL MONUMENT DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION PROJECT: UTILIZING TERRESTRIAL LIDAR FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY CONCERNS FOR COASTAL FORTS AND COQUINA STRUCTURES (CESU, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE) LORI COLLINS, PH.D. AND TRAVIS DOERING, PH.D., 8/2013 CONTRIBUTIONS BY: JORGE GONZALEZ, STEVEN FERNANDEZ, JAMES MCLEOD, AND JOSEPH EVANS Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Dr. Margo Schwadron, Archeologist with the Southeast Archeological Center, who assisted with the planning, organizing, and implementation of this project and provided support, advice, and suggestions throughout the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve 2014 – 2016 Oyster Monitoring Summary
    Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve 2014 – 2016 Oyster Monitoring Summary Pam Marcum, Biologist Nikki Dix, Research Director Matt Monroe, Biologist June 8, 2018 INTRODUCTION Oysters provide many valuable services in estuaries and coastal communities. As suspension feeding bivalves, oysters remove large quantities of particulate carbon from waters and prevent phase shifts of estuarine communities to those dominated by planktonic and microbial organisms (Baird et al. 2004, Newell 1988). By removing suspended particles from the water column, oysters increase light penetration which in turn benefits the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation such as seagrass (Newell & Koch 2004). Suspension feeding causes oysters to integrate water quality conditions, also making them useful as bioindicators. Eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica) have been used to test for the presence of certain metals and for terrestrially sourced nitrogen in U.S. waters (Daskalakis 1996, Fertig et al. 2009, Kimbrough et al. 2008). Oysters also help to mediate eutrophication caused by nitrogen loading of estuarine waters by enhancing denitrification rates (Kellogg et al. 2014, Newell et al. 2002). Oyster reefs can reduce erosion to other estuarine habitats such as salt marsh and can be used as natural breakwaters to mitigate shoreline loss (Meyer et al. 1997, Scyphers et al. 2011, Stricklin et al. 2009). The structures created by oyster reefs also provide shelter as well as productive ecosystems for foraging and consequently host many birds, fish, and invertebrates, some of which are commercially and recreationally important species such as blue crabs, red drum, and snapper (Coen et al. 1999, Coen & Grizzle 2007, Tolley & Volety 2005). Unfortunately, the importance of oysters and their functions has been highlighted by losses in oyster populations.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2004 (PDF)
    National List of Beaches March 2004 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-04-004 i Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama ............................................................................................................... 3 Alaska................................................................................................................... 6 California .............................................................................................................. 9 Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 17 Delaware .............................................................................................................. 21 Florida .................................................................................................................. 22 Georgia................................................................................................................. 36 Hawaii................................................................................................................... 38 Illinois ................................................................................................................... 45 Indiana.................................................................................................................. 47 Louisiana
    [Show full text]
  • East Florida
    ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY INDEX: EAST FLORIDA INTRODUCTION 8C) Sheltered Riprap An Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) database has been 8D) Sheltered Rocky, Rubble Shores developed for the marine and coastal areas of East Florida. The Area 9A) Sheltered Tidal Flats of Interest (AOI) includes the following marine, coastal and 9B) Vegetated Low Banks estuarine water bodies: Atlantic Ocean from the Georgia - Florida border to Spanish River Park in Boca Raton, Florida; St. Marys River 9C) Hyper-Saline Tidal Flats and Amelia River (Fort Clinch SP); Nassau Sound, Nassau River, 10A) Salt- and Brackish-water Marshes South Amelia River, Back River (Amelia Island); Sawpit Creek, 10B) Freshwater Marshes Clapboard Creek, Simpson Creek, Mud River, Fort George River (Big Talbot and Little Talbot Islands); St. Johns River; Intracoastal 10C) Swamps Waterway; Guana River, Lake Ponte Vedra, Tolomato River (St. 10D) Scrub-Shrub Wetlands Augustine); Matanzas River, San Sebastian River, Salt Run 10F) Mangroves (Anastasia State Park); Pellicer Creek (Marineland); Halifax River, Rose Bay, Strickland Bay, Spruce Creek, Trumbull Bay (Daytona Each of the shoreline habitats are described on pages 10-18 in Beach); Ponce de Leon Inlet, Indian River North (Smyrna Beach); terms of their physical description, predicted oil behavior, and Mosquito Lagoon, Banana River (Canaveral National Seashore, response considerations. Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge); Indian River (Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge); St. Lucie River, Peck Lake (Jensen SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Beach); Loxahatchee River, Jupiter Inlet (Jupiter); Little Lake Worth, North Palm Beach Waterway, Earman River, Palm Beach Inlet; Lake Biological information presented in this atlas was collected, Worth Lagoon (Palm Beach); Gulf Stream (Delray Beach); and Lake compiled, and reviewed with the assistance of biologists and Rogers, Lake Wyman (Boca Raton).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan ______
    Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan _______________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX I: Critical Erosion Report _______________________________________________________________________________________ Florida Division of Emergency Management Critically Eroded Beaches In Florida Division of Water Resource Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection August 2016 2600 Blair Stone Rd., MS 3590 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 www.dep.state.fl.us Foreword This report provides an inventory of Florida’s erosion problem areas fronting on the Atlantic Ocean, Straits of Florida, Gulf of Mexico, and the roughly sixty-six coastal barrier tidal inlets. The erosion problem areas are classified as either critical or non-critical and county maps and tables are provided to depict the areas designated critically and non-critically eroded. Many areas have significant historic or contemporary erosion conditions, yet the erosion processes do not currently threaten public or private interests. These areas are therefore designated as non-critically eroded areas and require close monitoring in case conditions become critical. This report, originating in 1989, is periodically updated to include additions and deletions. All information is provided for planning purposes only and the user is cautioned to obtain the most recent erosion areas listing available in the updated critical erosion report of 2016 on pages 4 through 20 or refer to the specific county of interest listed
    [Show full text]
  • EA IAA Cut DA-9 at Bakers Inlet
    CESAD-ET-CO-M (CESAJ-C0/21Jun97) (ll-2-240a) 1st End Mr. DeVeaux/ dsm/(404) 331-6742 SUBJECT: Advanced Maintenance Dredging of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (IWW) Jacksonville to Miami, in the Vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet, Dade County, Florida Commander, South Atlantic Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 77 Forsyth Street, S.W., Room 322, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490 10 July 1997 FOR THE COMMANDER, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT, ATTN: CESAJ-CO 1. Your request to perform advanced maintenance in subject channel is approved subject to completing all appropriate environmental documentation, coordination, and clearance. Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement with the Florida Inland Navigation District is also required. 2. You should continue to monitor the cost of maintenance to assure that the proposed advanced maintenance dredging results in the least costly method of maintaining the channel. FOR THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES: ~&Peei JR., PE~ . Chief, Construction-Operations ~ Directorate of Engineering and Technical Services !<. c v ~...': 7 Yv / 9 7 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. 0. BOX 4970 JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32232-0019 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF CESAJ-CO (ll-2-240a) 21 June 1997 ~MORANDUM FOR CDR, USAED (CESAD-ET-CO-M), ATLANTA, GA 30335 SUBJECT: Advanced Maintenance Dredging of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (IWW) Jacksonville to Miami, in the Vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet, Dade County, Florida 1. Reference ER 1130-2-520. 2. Advanced maintenance dredging is proposed for the IWW in the vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet to reduce the frequency of dredging required for this reach of the IWW.
    [Show full text]